Your Opinions for Sunday, Aug. 24, 2014

In response to Aug. 6, guest opinion by Donna Brazile, "Americans take removing a president very seriously." Brazile could easily have been reduced to her beginning and ending paragraphs. The other 95 percent of her opinion was editorial hamburger helper, devoid of value, designed to focus the reader on petty politics instead of real issues.

Drilling down 5 percent of her opinion to two comments, Brazile begins by stating, "Two-thirds of the public opposes impeaching President Obama. Americans take removing an elected president seriously," and she ends with the conclusion that, "Except in the most egregious cases, that's how it should be."

With a bit of courage, Brazile could have written it this way; Up to one-third of the public may consider or wants to impeach Obama. She would then develop the supporting argument by re-visiting the lies and misdeeds our president has inflicted on the U.S. public including but not limited to: "If you like your health care insurance, you can keep it," the Benghazi cover-up, the exit plan in Afghanistan, and control of our "NO BORDER," border with Mexico.

Full disclosure and vetting of Obama's lies and broken promises would run multiple times in length compared to Brazile's drivel. But who cares about the truth when the media is intent on suffocating the public with blah, blah, blah and contorted misinformation supporting a man in his sixth year of on-the-job training.

Bruce Jacks, Woodland

Progressive liberalism wasn't correct regarding Ferguson

The editor's progressive liberalism raised its head in your 'Our Town' column last Sunday on militarization of police in the U.S. I too believe police agencies use SWAT like teams way to often when they are not needed in this country. What I didn't like were several of your early comments that were miss leading or not factual. First, Police Officer Wilson, who was alone, shot and killed the 18-year old, 6-4, 280 lbs. plus Michael Brown. It has been reported that this was the first fatal shooting by police in the city of Ferguson's history. Saying police shot Brown appears to indict or blame the whole city police department. It was reported that Wilson stated that he and Brown struggled over his weapon in his patrol car with one round being fired inside the vehicle. We do not know Wilson's state of mind at the time he shot Brown. The officer reported that Brown charged at him from 35 feet away which would have given officer Wilson no time to holster his weapon and use his Taser gun or pepper spray.

I believe you are factual wrong when you stated the Ferguson police officers met violence with extreme violence. Not really true. The police reportedly shot rubber bullets and tear gas to break up an ugly mob throwing bricks and molotov cocktails at them. No civilians were reportedly injured. One police officer sustained a broken ankle from being hit by a brick.

My last comment is that you write it was eerily similar to the Kent State shootings back in the 1970s. I thought my memory was bad, but apparently yours is worse. It was in 1970 when National Guardsmen fired well over 50 rounds at Vietnam protesting students, killing four and wounding nine others. Not similar at all. I was 23 and in South Vietnam at the time. What has it been now, four or five days of rioting after dark with no one shot or killed by police.